January 21, 2013

While I have never been suicidal, I've had to deal with suicidal friends more than I'd like. The hardest thing in the world is to get suicidal people to understand that, contrary to their entire life's experience, and contrary to every shred of evidence they have, things will get better. Eventually, they will have an experience they could never have imagined, they just have to hold on long enough. Sometimes it feels like our dreams are on the brink of suicide for similar reasons, and we must also convince ourselves that we just need to hold on to them for a little while longer.

The death of Aaron Swartz affected me deeply even though I honestly didn't know who he was until he died. Unlike what many people seem to be writing about on Hacker News, however, it was not because he was some kind of brilliant programmer (although he clearly was), it was because he was fighting for many of the same things I am fighting for. We were both disillusioned about the massive corruption that underlies modern society, and we can both be considered idealists. That Aaron's dreams were so oppressed that he took his own life is deeply disturbing to me.

Whenever you attempt to do something, you will encounter resistance. If you haven't had someone tell you you're an idiot for doing something yet, you just haven't been looking hard enough. It is not possible to post a blog on the internet and not have a comment telling you that everything you wrote is misinformed crap. Every time you start writing a program, you will use the wrong language. You will use the wrong library, make the wrong API choices, set the wrong default values, have terrible coding practices, and be both too high level and too low level at the same time. Every solution you come up with will be fundamentally flawed and used as a reason for why software development has gone downhill. At least one person will tell you to never write another line of code ever again for the benefit of mankind.

When the language fetishists start flinging mud over the fence, it is easy to get discouraged after they rail on about how terrible your language of choice is. Sometimes you'll wonder if some of your C++ code should really be C code, or if your event subsystem should be in Haskell. You launch products to the sounds of crickets. Repeated failures can be extremely draining to one's perseverance.

None of this matters. The visions that find us in our daydreams and play with us at night are what make life worth living. The dreams we fight for give us reason to exist, regardless of whether we achieve them or not. Just because things don't turn out the way we want to doesn't mean we can't still have a positive influence on the world.

If I could have told Aaron anything the night before he died, it would have been that no matter how hopeless things get, his dreams will always be worth fighting for. By simply being alive, we continue to uphold our ideals. Never stop trying, and you will continue to fight for what you believe in, even if you don't succeed the way you wanted to. People will tell you to give up, that its fruitless, meaningless, hopeless, misguided and useless. They are wrong.

For Aaron's sake, in memory of all his hopes and ideals, fight for your dreams, and never let go.

January 18, 2013

Technology tends to serve one of two purposes - to make us more efficient at some task, or to entertain us in our resulting free time. However, when we fixate on productivity to the exclusion of everything else, we often forget about the big picture. Perhaps the best example of this are people insisting that real coders need to use Vim to be productive due to it's unmatched text editing powers.

This is totally absurd. I spend maybe 10% of my time actually writing code, 30% debugging that code, and the remaining 60% trying to solve a problem. Even if I could write all my code instantly, I have only improved my productivity by 10%. I've found that changing my code patterns to let me catch bugs faster and earlier has had a much more significant impact on my coding speed, because taking a chunk out of 30% has a much greater effect on my overall productivity.

But what about the 60%? I'm sure I could make some of that go away with more powerful visualization tools and intense mental training, but when I hit a problem that's simply really hard to solve, nothing short of a cybernetic implant that makes my brain bigger is going to make a dent in how much time I spend thinking about something unless I want to make a stupid mistake and regret it later.

The issue that's arising from our hyperproductive tools is that our productivity is beginning to outstrip our ability to think. We are so productive we can't think fast enough to utilize it. Vim may be the most amazing text editor ever, but it doesn't matter because I spend more time thinking than I do actually editing text. We're so focused on making everyone super productive we seem to forget that we are beginning to receive diminishing returns from some of our efforts.

One consequence of this is that, obviously, we should be focusing on tools to help us think faster. We need to do profiling of people's lives to find the chokepoints and focus on those instead of doing the equivalent of micro-optimizations in C code that's only called every 5 minutes. That, however, does not concern me. What does concern me is the repeated mistakes futurists make when attempting to predict the future of technology.

This Microsoft video is a superb example of good technology predictions implemented in the worst way possible. The entire video treats human beings as machinery that needs to complete various tasks in the quickest way possible, instead of recognizing that human beings are, in fact, people. Many of the human interactions feel fake because all the interactions are treated simply as tasks that must be completed efficiently, regardless of how beneficial the time saved actually is. Productivity is not important, the way it feels is important.

Futuristic architecture often makes this same mistake, creating cold, bland environments that, while they do feel futuristic, are not things anyone would want to live or work in. We need environments that feel warm, inviting, and natural. When building futuristic environments, we must be extremely careful about where the future is peeking in, because there is such a thing as too much future in one room.

We make things look like wood simply because we like how wood looks, not because we need to build anything out of wood anymore. We like trees growing around our houses. We make our lights look like the sun instead of actually being white. We are constantly making arbitrary choices that have nothing to do with productivity and everything to do with making us feel comfortable. Until designers recognize this and stop sucking the life out of everything in an effort to make it more "productive", they will inevitably be shunned in favor of slightly less efficient, but more inviting designs.

Design is an optimization problem that must maximize both productivity and feel, not one or the other. Some people actually like color in their IDEs and webpages that consist of more than flat text, faint lines and whitespace.

January 11, 2013

I have a Zune I got as a prize at a Microsoft Hunt The Wumpus competition back when Microsoft was still under the delusion that they could actually compete with the iPod. My Zune has served me faithfully for almost 7 years. I am now on my third pair of earbuds for my Zune, and have noticed a disturbing trend.

The Zune has a volume control that goes from 0 to 20. I have sensitive ears, so with my first pair of earbuds, which came with the Zune and were presumably made by Microsoft, I listened to music at a volume of 3. Sometimes it was bumped up to 4, but never higher unless a particular song was abnormally quiet. I wish I could say this will let me keep my hearing pristine for many years to come, but standing next to the freeway for 4 years has probably screwed me over anyway.

Eventually these gave out and I had to get new ones. I picked the "Gumy" brand because it was almost identical to my previous earbuds and I like that style. I can't even hear bass properly due to a hearing defect so I really don't give a shit about "EXTREME BASS LOUDNESS!!!11!1!!one!!", and I've heard bad things about Skullcandy, which was literally the only other brand there. After plugging in my new earbuds, however, I noticed that a volume level of 3 was too loud - I thought my ears might be playing tricks on me, but after several tests, including a blind test, I was absolutely positive 3 was definitely too loud, and I'd have to reduce my volume to 2. Once again, volume level 3 would be used for quieter songs.

After another 2 or 3 years, my old Gumy earbuds have finally died, so I just went and bought new ones. Not interested in trying any new brands, I got the exact same brand, type, and color, such that my new earbuds were almost completely indistinguishable from my old ones. Then I plugged them in. Once again, they were significantly louder than my previous ones. Thinking perhaps my ears were not accustomed to the sound or perhaps my old earbuds had decreased in volume, I ran several tests, but I eventually realized that my comfortable level of listening had been reduced to a volume level of 1.

There is nothing below 1. If this trend continues, I will be forced to either find an exotic brand of earbuds I can only buy over the internet from a manufacturing plant on the moon that lets me actually listen to songs at a volume that does not cause hearing damage, or I will be forced to stop listening to music on my Zune. I'm not entirely sure how this trend is even possible, although it may have something to do with a miniature amplifier inside the earbuds, but it seems to be mirroring the infamous Loudness Wars. The issues involved with the Loudness Wars are a topic for another day, but this same phenomenon has occured with my headphones plugged into my computer. A comfortable volume is something like 5 on a scale from 0 to 100. At least in windows I can punch it into behaving reasonably, but it's still just as ridiculous.

I have always been annoyed at people listening to music at volumes that are obviously going to cause hearing damage for no real apparent reason, and its also why I avoid concerts like the plague, but now it seems that our society's obsession with loud music is making it almost impossible for me to not listen to loud music and it's pissing me the fuck off.

For now, my earbuds are working fine, and I can still listen to them comfortably on a volume level of 1 without problems, but if anyone knows a pair of non-stupid earbuds that does not fall victim to this trend, it would be useful information 3 years down the road when this pair gives out.

Also, if you are going to have a volume control, make it actually useful, please. I'm sick and tired of volume controls with a range from "Almost Too Loud" to "What The Fuck?!" At least some of us don't want to listen to music at offensively loud decibel levels. I can still tweak the volume in FL Studio when I'm mixing my tracks, but studio-quality headphones become a lot less useful when they have an effective integer volume range of 0-8.